To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

'f-- THANKSGIVING SPECIAL ISSUE,. fe FEB g 1949
"t -- r ,' ' L "iK'K?8W:
Volume X. Columbia, Missouri, Dec. 1, 1902. Number 11.
13 Q
Comment on Missouri's Defeat
It was football weather from the ground up.
A cloudless sky and a crisp wind made condi-tions
almost perfect for players and spectators,
consequently the largest crowd that ever atten-ded
the annual game was on hand at Sports-man's
Park to cheer Missouri and Kansas on to
victory. There were 7,500 paid admissions and
the receipts amounted to $9,023. Each school
cleared about $3,600. It is estimated that seven
out of every ten people were Missourians, and
no doubt many of the large crowd were in at-tendance
because they expected Missouri to
win. Many people in Kansas City who know
little of the game of football paid the high ad-mission
price in the hope that Missouri would
win, but, as usual, the Kansans did all the
playing and the Kansan supporters had all the
fun. The crowd was not handled very well at
the gate as there were several thousand people
in the street clamoring for admission when the
game began. There was only one entrance for
buying tickets and obtaining admission. Some
of the peole had to wait at least an hour before
they got up to the ticket window. After once
inside the arrangements were excellent. There
were a great many policemen on hand and the
gate keepers all knew their business and the
crowd was so distributed that every one saw
the game. But the crowd was not bunched up
enough for good rooting and outside of the
rooting done by "Salty" Sansom's Megaphone
Club, there was none worth mentioning. The
old "Rock Chalk Jayhawk K. U. " was not
given in concert except by one small group
of Kansans. The gridiron was in excellent
condition, the field suiting Kansas' fast plays
better tlun Missouri's mass formations. Both
teams were on the field by 2:30 p. m. and the
strugglebegan before 3 o'clock.
Kansas won on account of superior team
work, individual work and spirit of play. Cur-tis'
team had beautiful team work and they
played with a snap that contrasted with
the work of their opponents. The K. U. backs
got off fast and only a few times were they stop-ped
back of the line. K. U. played a new for-mation
that proved very effective. Mo. on the
other hand played formations familiar to Curtis,
in fact they played only those formations that the
Kansas coach saw in the Iowa game. Mis-souri's
backs got off slow and especially in the
second half they had to leap over the. line in
order to gain. The heavy men in the Missouri
line didn't seem to be able to open up any
holes. On account of the slowness of Missouri's
play K. U. was able to concentrate its de-fense
very efficiently. Missouri, u-in-g
the sin-gle
line defense, could not get together quick
enough to stop their opponent's fast attacks.
The crowd of newspaper men in the press
stand was very much surprised at Missouri's
tackling. So many times a Missouri player had
a chance to down a Kansan for a loss, but in-stead
of hitting the man about the knees, he
caught him by the neck or head, and then the
runner would twist out of his hold and go on.
But in this respect the Kansans were stars. They
were the best set of tacklers that ever repre-sented
K. U. They made up for their lightness
by their fierce and sure tackling. Coach Curtis
had a good tackling dummy and he practiced
the men with it all through the season. We
had a tackling machine out here also, but a
town "kid" named George was the only one
that ever practiced on it. The light line of K.
U. outplayed our line simply because they had
had superior coaching. In offering excuses for
Missouri's defeat, Captain Ellis and others said
that the men did not play their best game.
The team was not stale and it had as much
luck as Kansas, so if it did not play their best
there does not seem to be any satisfactory ex-cuse.
At times Missouri played with spirit and
gained ground consistently but these spurts
were always short lived. Had the signals been
given faster and the men lined up faster Mis-souri
would have kept up these spasmodic ef-forts
for longer stretches of time.
Of all the places in the team, the ends seemed
weakest. This was not the fault of the ends so
much as it was the fault of the halves and tack-les.
Almost every time the ends were boxed
in or boxed out by three or four Kansans and
the Missouri halves and tackles. did not break
up the interference so that the ends could get
the man. Kansas very seldom failed to gain
around the ends, and they used end formation
more than any other play. All through the
game the Kansas line men got the jump on the
Tigers, and the team was further handicapped
because they lined up in a V-sha- pe formation
from the center. Kansas was bound to make
some gain on this kind of formation. In the
second half the Kansas line improved on de-fense,
while the Missouri line weakened. In
the first part of the game the tackles found
holes and often plunged through for good gains
but in the second half the men were constantly
forced to hurdle in order to gain at all.
As to individual work, few of the Tigers can
be given much praise. Ardinger gained con
sistently while he lasted, but he did not play
his usual game on defense. Twice he broke
through the K. U. interference on end runs and
tackled the men high, and each time the runner
wriggled around and went on for good gain.
Anamosa probably deserves more praise than
any man on the team. He made more
gains than anyone and time and time again
was the only man that stopped the K. U. run-ner.
Birney did not play the game he is capa-ble
of. His old fault of calling signals slow
was very much in evidence and his tackling"
was very high. Twice a K. U. man got by him
but was tackled from behind by some other Mis-souria- n.
Kirk did well on defense, and hurdled
well but he made no long gain. Wulff did not
find holes very successfully. Jesse played a spir-ited
game at tackle and consequently fewer of
the K. U. plays were directed this way.
The game was started with Kansas receiving
the kick off and having the advantage of both
the strong wind and the slope. Pooler caught
the ball on the kick-o- ff but was downed after a
few yards gain. On the next scrimmage a K.
U. half made 12 yards around Anderson and on
the next play the other K. U. half made 12 more
around Smith. Kansas using end runs mostly,
quickly advanced the ball fifty yards where she
lost it on downs. Then Missouri, although at a
disadvantage on account of the slope, c-tn- e
back consistently for about 35 yards where she
was held on downs. Here K. U. made short
gains till Cook made the longest run of the
day, a 28-ya- rd sprint around Smith. The ball
was on the 17 yard line and while M. S. U.
played a good game in defending the goal, Vin-cent
at last carried the ball over the line.
The Tigers now kicked off to K. U. this
time having the down hill. K. U. worked the
ball to her 30 yard line where Missouri got the
ball on a fumble. Missouri immediately lost
the ball on downs, and K. U. after a few plays
punted to Birney at the center of the field.
Here the Tigers did their best work of the day.
Anamosa and Ardinger made good gains and
carried the ball to the 14 yard line when Ellis
was called back and on a mass play on left
tackle carried the ball across the goal line.
This was the best run made by any Missouri
man.
The team changed sides again and K. U.
kicked to Ardinger, but the latter fumbled and
a Kansan fell on the ball on our 15 yard line.
The ball was worked to the 5 yard line where
Missouri held. Some fine work was done
here by Missouri. It began to look as if the
Tigers held K. U. safe. Missouri carried the
(Continued on Page 3)

'f-- THANKSGIVING SPECIAL ISSUE,. fe FEB g 1949
"t -- r ,' ' L "iK'K?8W:
Volume X. Columbia, Missouri, Dec. 1, 1902. Number 11.
13 Q
Comment on Missouri's Defeat
It was football weather from the ground up.
A cloudless sky and a crisp wind made condi-tions
almost perfect for players and spectators,
consequently the largest crowd that ever atten-ded
the annual game was on hand at Sports-man's
Park to cheer Missouri and Kansas on to
victory. There were 7,500 paid admissions and
the receipts amounted to $9,023. Each school
cleared about $3,600. It is estimated that seven
out of every ten people were Missourians, and
no doubt many of the large crowd were in at-tendance
because they expected Missouri to
win. Many people in Kansas City who know
little of the game of football paid the high ad-mission
price in the hope that Missouri would
win, but, as usual, the Kansans did all the
playing and the Kansan supporters had all the
fun. The crowd was not handled very well at
the gate as there were several thousand people
in the street clamoring for admission when the
game began. There was only one entrance for
buying tickets and obtaining admission. Some
of the peole had to wait at least an hour before
they got up to the ticket window. After once
inside the arrangements were excellent. There
were a great many policemen on hand and the
gate keepers all knew their business and the
crowd was so distributed that every one saw
the game. But the crowd was not bunched up
enough for good rooting and outside of the
rooting done by "Salty" Sansom's Megaphone
Club, there was none worth mentioning. The
old "Rock Chalk Jayhawk K. U. " was not
given in concert except by one small group
of Kansans. The gridiron was in excellent
condition, the field suiting Kansas' fast plays
better tlun Missouri's mass formations. Both
teams were on the field by 2:30 p. m. and the
strugglebegan before 3 o'clock.
Kansas won on account of superior team
work, individual work and spirit of play. Cur-tis'
team had beautiful team work and they
played with a snap that contrasted with
the work of their opponents. The K. U. backs
got off fast and only a few times were they stop-ped
back of the line. K. U. played a new for-mation
that proved very effective. Mo. on the
other hand played formations familiar to Curtis,
in fact they played only those formations that the
Kansas coach saw in the Iowa game. Mis-souri's
backs got off slow and especially in the
second half they had to leap over the. line in
order to gain. The heavy men in the Missouri
line didn't seem to be able to open up any
holes. On account of the slowness of Missouri's
play K. U. was able to concentrate its de-fense
very efficiently. Missouri, u-in-g
the sin-gle
line defense, could not get together quick
enough to stop their opponent's fast attacks.
The crowd of newspaper men in the press
stand was very much surprised at Missouri's
tackling. So many times a Missouri player had
a chance to down a Kansan for a loss, but in-stead
of hitting the man about the knees, he
caught him by the neck or head, and then the
runner would twist out of his hold and go on.
But in this respect the Kansans were stars. They
were the best set of tacklers that ever repre-sented
K. U. They made up for their lightness
by their fierce and sure tackling. Coach Curtis
had a good tackling dummy and he practiced
the men with it all through the season. We
had a tackling machine out here also, but a
town "kid" named George was the only one
that ever practiced on it. The light line of K.
U. outplayed our line simply because they had
had superior coaching. In offering excuses for
Missouri's defeat, Captain Ellis and others said
that the men did not play their best game.
The team was not stale and it had as much
luck as Kansas, so if it did not play their best
there does not seem to be any satisfactory ex-cuse.
At times Missouri played with spirit and
gained ground consistently but these spurts
were always short lived. Had the signals been
given faster and the men lined up faster Mis-souri
would have kept up these spasmodic ef-forts
for longer stretches of time.
Of all the places in the team, the ends seemed
weakest. This was not the fault of the ends so
much as it was the fault of the halves and tack-les.
Almost every time the ends were boxed
in or boxed out by three or four Kansans and
the Missouri halves and tackles. did not break
up the interference so that the ends could get
the man. Kansas very seldom failed to gain
around the ends, and they used end formation
more than any other play. All through the
game the Kansas line men got the jump on the
Tigers, and the team was further handicapped
because they lined up in a V-sha- pe formation
from the center. Kansas was bound to make
some gain on this kind of formation. In the
second half the Kansas line improved on de-fense,
while the Missouri line weakened. In
the first part of the game the tackles found
holes and often plunged through for good gains
but in the second half the men were constantly
forced to hurdle in order to gain at all.
As to individual work, few of the Tigers can
be given much praise. Ardinger gained con
sistently while he lasted, but he did not play
his usual game on defense. Twice he broke
through the K. U. interference on end runs and
tackled the men high, and each time the runner
wriggled around and went on for good gain.
Anamosa probably deserves more praise than
any man on the team. He made more
gains than anyone and time and time again
was the only man that stopped the K. U. run-ner.
Birney did not play the game he is capa-ble
of. His old fault of calling signals slow
was very much in evidence and his tackling"
was very high. Twice a K. U. man got by him
but was tackled from behind by some other Mis-souria- n.
Kirk did well on defense, and hurdled
well but he made no long gain. Wulff did not
find holes very successfully. Jesse played a spir-ited
game at tackle and consequently fewer of
the K. U. plays were directed this way.
The game was started with Kansas receiving
the kick off and having the advantage of both
the strong wind and the slope. Pooler caught
the ball on the kick-o- ff but was downed after a
few yards gain. On the next scrimmage a K.
U. half made 12 yards around Anderson and on
the next play the other K. U. half made 12 more
around Smith. Kansas using end runs mostly,
quickly advanced the ball fifty yards where she
lost it on downs. Then Missouri, although at a
disadvantage on account of the slope, c-tn- e
back consistently for about 35 yards where she
was held on downs. Here K. U. made short
gains till Cook made the longest run of the
day, a 28-ya- rd sprint around Smith. The ball
was on the 17 yard line and while M. S. U.
played a good game in defending the goal, Vin-cent
at last carried the ball over the line.
The Tigers now kicked off to K. U. this
time having the down hill. K. U. worked the
ball to her 30 yard line where Missouri got the
ball on a fumble. Missouri immediately lost
the ball on downs, and K. U. after a few plays
punted to Birney at the center of the field.
Here the Tigers did their best work of the day.
Anamosa and Ardinger made good gains and
carried the ball to the 14 yard line when Ellis
was called back and on a mass play on left
tackle carried the ball across the goal line.
This was the best run made by any Missouri
man.
The team changed sides again and K. U.
kicked to Ardinger, but the latter fumbled and
a Kansan fell on the ball on our 15 yard line.
The ball was worked to the 5 yard line where
Missouri held. Some fine work was done
here by Missouri. It began to look as if the
Tigers held K. U. safe. Missouri carried the
(Continued on Page 3)